ARUN v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. HOME DEPTT. LKO AND 3 OTHERS
BAIL/11114/2024 · 2025-04-24
Subhash Vidyarthi
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 165715 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 165715 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:23620 Court No. - 15 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 11114 of 2024 Applicant :- Arun Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Rajiva Dubey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.
1. Heard Sri Rajiva Dubey, the learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Jayant Singh Tomar, learned Additional Government Advocate-I for the State and perused the records. 2. The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 66 of 2024, under Sections 363, 366, 376 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, registered at Police Station Nighasan, District Lakhimpur Kheri. 3. The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged on 13.03.2024 against the applicant, his sister and sister's husband stating that the applicant had enticed away the informant's minor daughter on 10.03.2024 with the assistance of co-accused persons. 4. In the statement of the victim recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. she stated that she had herself gone with the applicant to Maharashtra and she has married him. Upon coming to know about lodging of F.I.R. she came back. 5. The medico legal examination report of the victim mentions no mark of injury or sign of use of force. The radiological examination for ascertaining the age of the victim was not
conducted. 6. In the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. she stated that the applicant is her cousin and she had gone with him out of her own freewill. In response to questions put to her she categorically stated that the applicant had not used force against her and she had not gone with him. 7. In the affidavit filed in support of bail application it has been stated that the applicant is innocent, he has been falsely implicated in the present case and he has no criminal history. 8. The State has filed a counter affidavit annexing therewith copies of materials collected during investigation and copy of charge sheet dated 06.06.2024. A supplementary rejoinder affidavit has been filed on behalf of the applicant annexing therewith copy of relevant extracts of case diary as per which the educational document mentions the date of birth of the victim to be 21.01.2007. 9.
Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the statement of the victim wherein she has not levelled any allegation against the applicant; that the applicant has no previous criminal history and he is languishing in jail since 16.05.2024 and the investigation already stands concluded and without making any observation, which may affect the merits of the case, I am of the view that the aforesaid facts are sufficient for making out a case for enlargement of the applicant on bail in the aforesaid crime. 10. Accordingly, this bail application stands allowed. 11. Let the applicant-Arun be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of magistrate/court concerned,
subject to following conditions:- (i) the applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; (ii) the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses; (iii) the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court, unless his appearance is exempted by the learned trial court. (Subhash Vidyarthi, J.) Order Date :- 24.4.2025 Ram. Digitally signed by :- RAM SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench